I’m new and I need help

The .30 carbine cartridge is kind of a light bullet .357 magnum class cartridge. Think about it; 1900 FPS with a 110 grain bullet makes it a HOT pistol round out of an 18" barrel. It is also comparable to a hot loaded .32/20 Winchester as well. These are not really RIFLE cartridges in the truest sense; but they are all darned deadly little pills when one zips completely through the boiler room of anything that walks crawls or slithers on the planet. The .30 Carbine round makes the 9X19 look downright pitiful even when you are talking +P+ out of a SMG. I watched a 14 year old kid just hammer the dickens out of a 200 yard gong one afternoon with an old WWII carbine and some 100 grain plinkers. Yes, it's got combat potential even at ranges 150 yards farther than the .45 pistol it was intended to supplement. (Actually it was the Military that said the .45 was only a 50 yard weapon; not me) I don't know why the carbine got the bum rap in combat so bad, but I suppose that when enough killing is going down that you'll start to see a lot of really good weapons fail to do the job once in a while. That includes the .30/06 as well, but it's a no-brainer that the bigger more powerful ones will fail LESS often than the little ones will. I've read of people sustaing horrible and ultimately fatal wounds from stuff as powerful as a .45ACP, .44 magnum, and 12 ga buckshot, slugs, .30/30 SP's and more and take quite a while to stop walking,running, and ultimately die, so condemning cartridges that have statistical records of good lethality and "stopping power" that spans nearly 60 years is something that I try to avoid these days more than ever. Yes, I used to get into the hype and controversial debates of .223 Vs 7.62 and 9mm VS .45, but there is a lot more recorded data these days to support the position that it doen't matter a whole lot what the bullet or cartridge is in combat. Other factors will always be a whole lot more important than that.AW

Pocketnavy, how can you justify using a .223 on deer? I bet you just wanted to make even more controversy than there already is .

NH_Hunter

Jayrando;

So - how does one cite oneself in Nevada?  Did your friend require medical attention to recover from the laughing fit?  The questions are endless!

900F

 

  What about those .32 caliber bullets??????? Don't they seat sort of hard in that .30 carbine case? max

I thought about a red dot, but I've never seen one on a .30 carbine.  I'm sure someone has done it.  Do you have any idea how to mount it, or what red dot is best, or anything.  As I said, I am open to any suggestions.  To tell the truth, I'm just having fun with my .30.  I can't stand having it just lying around.  Gotta put it to some good use.[

 

QUOTE=tj3006]

         The first rifle I ever had was a GI 30 carbine and I would love to have another !   for keeping foxes out of the hen hous its a great tool !

     I would ditch the scope and either use the factory sights or put an red dot on it.  There are lots of good hollow points available for it and that would make caribne a fine stopper. Its true lots of GI,S cussed it but they were stuck with geneva convention hard ball ammo. I guarentee with a good stif load of 296 at a 1900 fps a 110 grain HP in the M1 would stop a fox or a wolf or a coyote rel quick and would make a very good home defence gun to boot !

   ...tj3006

 

[/QUOTE]

     Read the the post that started this thread The guy is using the carbine for close range fast shooting to protect his livestock. he will be shooting predators, not deer or people. Also he is a handloader. His M1 is a grat choice for a fast handeling low recoiling short range critter gitter. And in the case of using the carbine as a home protection piece with hollow points it would be an excelent choice provided it is reliable. Although over penatration would be a concern.

   Certainly the carbine with hardball is a poor choice in a fire fight but when coyotes start shooting back I'll probly do a lot more fishing ! The biggest problem I have with the carbine is that for its relitivly whimpy power level, it is awfully loud ! 

   ...tj3006

Wow! Talk about hitting it right on the head.  Good job!  This proves some people do listen.  Others would rather argue.  I suggest we drop the whole subject of carbines.  Even many soldiers during the war didn't understand the carbine.  Why Pocketnavy keeps wanting to compare it to a battle rifle, which is an infantry weapon, instead of to a pistol, as was intended, is wierd to me.  You described my use exactly.  I could not find a better weapon to fill my needs.  The darned thing has hung around the house for years not serving any need.  As Pocketnavy said, correctly, I might add, the carbine is not good for deer hunting, not as good as a pistol in tight (defensive) places, and certainly not a competition rifle.  So, I found it's place, and I seriously doubt anything could do better for the need which you described for me.

I could go on and explain why the .223 is the wrong weapon for deer also, but my oldest son, a Marine rifle instructor, could do that better, so we'll leave it for another topic, except to say that the .223 is designed to STOP an enemy, not necessarily kill that enemy, and we all know why. It causes devastating wounds, per my son's experience in the Corps, and that's why most states won't let you use it on deer.  It could wound them horribly, but not kill them.  It's use is not comparable in any way to the .30, which could kill deer the same as a .357 handgun at close ranges....but I don't recommend it.

BTW, I have decided to use Sierra's .308 85 gr. RN in some cases, and Speer's 110 gr. Varmint bullet in other situations.  These are what the factories recommend to me and assured great results.  They said that would probably be the best way to go, even if the .32 does work, or would work, as the case may or may not be.  The .32 does load up in that .30 brass and makes a nice looking bullet, though.

Nice job paying attention to the topic, instead of going off on a tangent.  I appreciate the support.

 

 

tj3006 wrote:      Read the the post that started this thread The guy is using the carbine for close range fast shooting to protect his livestock. he will be shooting predators, not deer or people. Also he is a handloader. His M1 is a grat choice for a fast handeling low recoiling short range critter gitter. And in the case of using the carbine as a home protection piece with hollow points it would be an excelent choice provided it is reliable. Although over penatration would be a concern.    Certainly the carbine with hardball is a poor choice in a fire fight but when coyotes start shooting back I'll probly do a lot more fishing ! The biggest problem I have with the carbine is that for its relitivly whimpy power level, it is awfully loud !     ...tj3006

Well DZRTRAM . . . we are not as far apart as it might seem.  First, I am well aware of the history of the development of the M1 carbine . . . and the fact that SOME people thought it might be a better weapon than the .45 ACP.  Some people think it was . . . some don't . . . I am in the latter group.  The M1 carbine, and even more so, the M2 carbine, were erratic at best, inaccurate at least, and not much protection at the worst.  I'll cross your eyes permanently with a .45 . . . I'd have to wait and see what was happening with a .30 cal M1 carbine.

No . .  I was NOT comparing it with a battle rifle . . . it is just that in combat one must make wise choices . . . an extra couple of pounds saved might mean a life lost.

I point out again that I have quite a bit of experience with the carbine . . . particularly with the M2 . . . and its associated infrared scope.  Although all I ever did with the M-16 was qualify with it, I would MUCH rather have the M-16 - as a lightweight weapon - than the M1/M2.  They served a purpose - to some people - in their time - but the Army moved on to better things.

As far as the .223 not being legal for deer - that is just not true.  I used a Mini-14 on whitetail deer in Texas and it was a one-shot kill.  However, I must admit, that I usually recommend something else for big-game hunting.  I have had two .30-06 rifles and they, like the old M1, do what they do with great effectiveness.  I would never buy another .223 - except for varmint hunting.

Just a suggestion - since you are interested in varmint hunting - how about something in .223 or .22-250?  Great for such uses.

Ummmm Pocketnavy, i never said anything about using the .30 carbine in Vietnam. In fact, i dont remember ever saying anything about Vietnam. When have i used the term "Nam" anyways? Also, i knew about the m2, and how bad it was. I also never said anything about hunting with a .30 carbine.

I know i lack expertise, but i do know how to read. I know that the m1 carbine HAS killed people. Are you denying that?

Now, what is pissing you off so much that i am doing? No need to be an a**hole. Like i said to some guy over at Shooters, TAKE A CHILL PILL!!!

NH_Hunter

NH Hunter, just ignore what's going on.  As the old saying goes, "You can tell the size of a man by the size of the thing that makes him angry".  All this talk about M16s, M1s, etc, have nothing to do with the subject we are discussing.  Pocketnavy, hereafter referred to as PN, is way off topic.  What he has to say has merit.... if that's what we were discussing, but we are NOT!  Whatever the .30 could or could not do in war has absolutely not one thing to do with our discussion.  I got off on that too.  It was I who brought up Vietnam where some .30s were used by LRRPs and others because they are not offensive weapons, but do have high penetration.  If you look up a ballistics chart you will see that the muzzle energy of the .357 and the .30 carbine are nearly identical. Let's just leave it at this.  I got pretty upset too when an adult talks to a teenager like that.  There is no call for it.  You seem to be a fine young man who wants to learn, and is doing a good job of researching.

Keep it up.